You posters from Boston dredge up old news. Yes Dr. Buss talked with the Wolves about acquiring KG and it was reported that KG wanted to come to L.A. (KG has a home in Malibu, CA). It was McHale that convinced the owner to trade KG to Boston. And initially KG wanted nothing to do with Bean Town. Later KG changed his tune, wanting to soothe potentially angry Boston fans who might have felt offended by KG's serious reluctance tocome toBoston. Once he agreed to a sign-and-trade sweetner, everyone was happy. As for Howard and trade possibilities, the Orlando center has never said he wants out of the Magic organization. This entire post is based on delusions. Howard isn't going anywhere not if Magic ownership has anything to say about it.Posted by LakerFan67

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : Gasol is a player anyone would love to have - but not at 3 and 57 - understand? Odom has already been around the league, and his rep speaks for itself - 2 yrs 16? Bynum is NOT as good as Howard, and I wouldn't make that trade because the improvement will be negligible. Posted by hedleylamarr

The improvement is NOT negligible.

1) Howard is better than Bynum, as you admit.

2) Bynum is an injury risk. Howard's track record there is much better. Was it you or Fierce saying that it's in Bynum's DNA?

3) Offensively, Bynum is low on the totem pole. When the Lakers were nursing a lead in the 4th quarter of game 3, Bynum had established position at the post in many occasions but the ball handler totally ignored him, rather passed the ball out at the perimeter or took the shot.

Odom 10:42Brown 9:04Odom 8:22Odom 7:49 Brown 5:58Kobe 4:12

As a matter of fact, he only took 2 shots in the 4th, one at the right elbow and an offensive rebound (1 for 2 in the quarter). The Lakers completely tuned him out as an offensive option, even though he was the top scorer (21 points) in that game.

Howard, on the other hand, is the #1 center in the league and an established 20-point scorer. He can easily be the #2 option over Gasol. His presence will command much more respect in the low post offense from the Lakers themselves. The result, a bigger emphasis on pounding the ball inside.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : And got exactly what you paid for.Posted by lakersavenger

Errr we as The Lakers gave up nothing to sign Shaq. Yes we did get what we paid for. Three championships won mainly because of the presence of Shaq. He was at the peak of his ability during the three-peat.

Anyone who thinks that we 'traded' for Shaq must not know their history.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : The reason Andrew Bynum is not averaging 20 ppg is because the Lakers have the #1 ball hog in the NBA. While Howard is better defensively, Andrew Bynum is the better offensive player. If Bynum didn't have Sam Bowie's genes there's no doubt the Magic would be willing to swap Dwight for Bynum. Unfortunately Andrew Bynum is damaged goods. Dwight Howard will never average 20 ppg if his teammate is Kobe Bryant. And now that Phil Jackson is no longer coach, expect Kobe to hog the ball even more.Posted by Fiercest34

Interesting Point, could Bryant learn to 'give up' taking all the shots and off load more of the offensive work to Howard and Gasol?

Kareem was able to do this, but would Bryant's ego all him to do it? If he cares about legacy then yes. Because changing the style of play and building the offense around Howard and Gasol could enable us to win more championships.

Wilt was also able to sacrifice his offensive game for the good of the team. And I don't know who has/had the bigger ego between Bryant and Wilt. Could be an interesting time if Howard does end up with us.

I actually could see him more likely playing alongside Blake Griffen, but given the Clippers sorry history, they'd be likely to shoot themselves in the foot and botch the deal.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : Interesting Point, could Bryant learn to 'give up' taking all the shots and off load more of the offensive work to Howard and Gasol? Kareem was able to do this, but would Bryant's ego all him to do it? If he cares about legacy then yes. Because changing the style of play and building the offense around Howard and Gasol could enable us to win more championships. Wilt was also able to sacrifice his offensive game for the good of the team. And I don't know who has/had the bigger ego between Bryant and Wilt. Could be an interesting time if Howard does end up with us. I actually could see him more likely playing alongside Blake Griffen, but given the Clippers sorry history, they'd be likely to shoot themselves in the foot and botch the deal.Posted by RUWorthy

I do agree that if Howard does end up with the Lakers, Kobe definitely needs to become more a team player. The Lakers lost several games during the regular season since Kobe wasn't able to get his teammates more involved. He definitely needs to become more team oriented, something that I am not sure that Kobe is able to do.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : Since we've got a guy named Rico who pretends to be a Celtics fan, RuWorthy comes swooping in to pretend he's a Lakers fan. Or maybe you're just a sycophant. You're actually defending the Board flake Fiercest34. Posted by icnd

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : And a lovely new member we have here.Posted by RUWorthy

You know, we're all adults here (well, most of us). If you're really a Lakers fan, I'm sure we're mature enough to appreciate reasoned debates about LA and Boston. In other words, you don't have to be a brownnoser to get a little respect around here. On the other hand, at least your avatar is easy on the eyes.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : True. Wilt led the league in assists one year.Posted by Kirk6

Changed his game a fair bit from his early days. Which must have been hard to do for a guy who averaged 50 points a game.

I don't think anyone will ever have that sort of offensive impact in the NBA again. 1967 must have been a sweet year for him on a personal level to get that first championship. And get though Russell in the process.

Although some posters here may consider him a 'loser' for only picking up ONE championship in the 1960's.

Wonder if Bryant is capable of making such a change. Haven't seen any indication that he might, and we'll need a very good coach to get the team moving, Phil is a massive loss. Irreplaceable really, particularly with the teams personality.

In Response to Re: Howard trade possibility : You know, we're all adults here (well, most of us). If you're really a Lakers fan, I'm sure we're mature enough to appreciate reasoned debates about LA and Boston. In other words, you don't have to be a brownnoser to get a little respect around here. On the other hand, at least your avatar is easy on the eyes.Posted by icnd

Not brownnosing at all thank you kindly. I see myself as a guest around here and part of being a good guest is not to cause trouble with your host. It's just good manners. Make my points and keep it civil. And it's hard when you get some really people who are only here to cause trouble.

Now some of these people may not be that way. One Laker troll could well be playing an Andy Kaufman like gag on the board, and I would laugh my lungs out at that in hindsight, because Andy was the master. But I don't think the majority are working on an Andy Kaufman level. More likely just people who talk big behind a keyboard and say things that I hope they would not say in person, otherwise they could get a punch in the face.

There's some reason around some of the debates here and I've been around for a while now. There's way too many Laker 'fans' who cause trouble here for no good reason, except to attempt to get rises out of Celtics fans. Some people like it but to me they're just like annoying little boys.

I have very strong opinions on Bryant and the Minneapolis era and most Laker fans don't really like discussing my side of those issues. It's a my whole 'my country right or wrong' mentality which isn't a smart way to go about. I love the Lakers but I really despise Bryant as a person. He's a fine player, but nowhere near our best ever, he wouldn't even make my all time best Laker starting five. He's fortunate to play in an era where media saturation is extreme. And players skills are amplified beyond what they actually are, thanks to the media and their own hype machine. I'd take Duncan as a player to build my team around rather than Bryant any day of the week.

And yes, Steel was the best Superhero movie of 1997 and hopefully if Dwight does become a Laker he'll follow in Shaq's footsteps and make Steel 2.

I love the Lakers but I really despise Bryant as a person. He's a fine player, but nowhere near our best ever, he wouldn't even make my all time best Laker starting five. He's fortunate to play in an era where media saturation is extreme. And players skills are amplified beyond what they actually are, thanks to the media and their own hype machine.Posted by RUWorthy

Is this the same media saturation that was absent when Magic hopped from one sexual partner to another before he contracted HIV, dodging a bullet when his wife and kid tested HIV-negative. And did you forget Magic kicking Laker coach Westhead to the curb when he pouted about the Lakers offense in 81? How about James Worthy in 1990 when the police handcuffted him for prositution solicitation? Are these the great Lakers you were fawning over? It's obvious Kobe is not a Boy Scout, but your issues with Bryant ring hypocritical when you gloat about other past Lakers.